tv Bloomberg Business Week Bloomberg February 11, 2017 3:00pm-4:01pm EST
carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i am carol massar. oliver: i am oliver renick. carroll: in this week's issue, how trip -- how president trump's pick for labor secretary views of america. oliver plus, the algorithm that : could help police catch serial killers. carol: a lucrative second career for steve young. oliver: all the ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ carol: we are here with assistant managing editor jim ellis. you guys look at ivanka trump, who seems to be important when it comes to china policy.
>> it seems to be strange. normally you would suspect season diplomats is who you would turn to if you wanted to deal with one of our most important of powerful adversaries. instead, right now a lot of the china hands are not in place, and also mr. trump has a different way of pursuing diplomacy, it seems. right now, we have had bad blood between the u.s. and china. the president has said a lot of things that have upset china. in a back channel way, his daughter and her husband have been meeting with china test chinese officials. her husband, jerod kushner, who is a senior advisor at the white house has been talking to the chinese ambassador, and there was a very public visit between him and his family to the chinese ambassador to celebrate chinese new year, and they even had ivanka's daughter on line singing a song in mandarin, which was well received in
china, as a way to offset the snub sense president trump did not do a thank you as far as chinese new year. carroll: guilty. i watched it. it came across twitter, and it was actually quite adorable. oliver: trump has obviously taking a hard line in terms of his language about china. it is ironic given all that that there has not been a clear point person, so now there is this opening to take a softer angle, and that is where ivanka comes in. >> right, he is using his family members, whether he is doing it or somebody is doing it, using his family to temper his rough spots. it is something we have not seen in a very long time, the dependence on family members to actually sort of jump in and almost be players. oliver: let's talk about andrew puzder, the focus of the cover
story and a great feature piece about what we can learn about what he will do based on his own corporate experience. andrew puzder is a very interesting guy, in the sense he is like donald trump in a way. >> he is outspoken. he is a person who believes in his own counsel and says a lot of things often, even in the business world, that people would consider to be not pc. this is a man who runs a company that basically sells to the dude market. he is famous for selling burgers with women who are very attractive helping to sell burgers. this is a man who told entrepreneur magazine that he really likes women in bikinis selling burgers. he says it is the american way, and so he is a person who feels comfortable talking about his own beliefs, which tend to be conservative and very pro-entrepreneur and a lot less
at least this of the pro-worker, which is odd because he will be the head of the department of labor, which in past administrations has been the point guide to stand up for the little guy. carol: we heard about andrew puzder and some of the issues at his restaurants. >> since 2005, they have employed a very successful in some regard strategy of very beautiful, buxom -- is that the right word? anyway, women in bikinis eating their burgers, and it has, it was designed to appeal to young men. they consider their audience young, hungry guys. obviously a lot of criticism from women for being raunchy, even from franchisees for being inappropriate for the market. carol: who is the guy behind the strategy?
>> andrew puzder, now nominated to be the head of the department of labor, and he has run the company since 2000. he was a former lawyer. he came in when carl's jr. was predominantly in california. they had just bought hardee's, so he gets credit for turning it around and getting momentum going, but they have done it on the backs of these women. they have also recently decided it is a strategy that is not working as well, and they are switching to something more wholesome. carol: i think what is important is that he has been nominated to be secretary of the department of labor, so we want to look at how he ran his company, what were his labor practices, employment practices, because
some of them were questionable. >> and what that means for him potentially running this vast agency, and for the 125 million people that the agency directly affects, so the fast food industry over all has a pretty bad record when it comes to wages, sexual harassment, even racial discrimination. that is industrywide, so there is a question, should somebody from that industry be selected to represent workers' interests. if you look at his two companies in particular, there are violations for sure, and when you read about them, it is dispiriting, people getting their paychecks cut without knowing, not paying for what they earned basically. there are cases of racial discrimination, sexual
harassment, they had at least six cases in front of the equal opportunity commission, and then regular department of labor violations like almost every restaurant, and by our measure, actually they are not the worst. they are among the best, but -- the overall industry is the one the department of labor has targeted over the past couple of years precisely because there are so many violations generally. >> he has kind of casually denigrated his own workers over the years and conversations. it has come out recently that he called them the best of the worst. he has talked about, as a lot of fast food executives have, about automation, but then he takes it further. you could say maybe we will need some self-service kiosks, but then he goes on to say it will be great because they won't sue
and they won't complain and they always smile. carol: turning andrew puzder into a cover model was the job of creative director rob vargas. rob: we were thinking of a fresh way to announce that there are concerns over his qualifications, and so we came up with this simple question and answer game where the answer is obvious. the question is "is trump's nominee for labor andrew pozner yet another reason for american workers to worry?" oliver: tell us about the international cover. there is another story here. rob: four a more global audience, we thought we would have the exclusive interview with the ceo of ge, so we ran a
large photo and one of the quotes were he talks about potentially being at a trade war with china. oliver: so a huge company, multinational, something that applies to everyone. rob: definitely. oliver: up next, the republican lawmakers that one of put a restriction on dissent. carol: the power grab in turkey and what it means for the future of the country. oliver: that is up next on "bloomberg businessweek". ♪
carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek". i am carol massar. oliver: i am oliver renick. carol: a new trend in statehouses across the united states. oliver: republicans are devising laws to regulate public dissent. we talked with matt phillips. matt: we have 10 bills and states, legislators across the country, washington, missouri, michigan, north carolina,
basically trying to get their arms around how they can legally reduce the impact of these protests, whether that is by loosening what determines whether somebody can be arrested, whether that is imposing costs on people who are arrested who do property damage, that kind of thing. the first amendment gives people the right to peaceably assemble, right? so this is a question that is being posed and a lot of these, whether shutting down traffic and highways in missouri for example, peaceably, constitutes peaceably assembling or doing property damage for example in business districts. that is what they are trying to get their arms around. carol: it is that specific? traffic problems? it is interesting the kind of bills coming down. matt: for example, in missouri,
by the way, these are all bills, proposed bills. in missouri for example, ferguson, after the michael brown shooting incurred $5 million of property damage. you cannot disguise yourself as a protester, whether that is wearing a robe, a mask, or even a gas mask to protect yourself from say pepper spray. that is how specific they are getting. it is a proposal. in north dakota, where we have seen thousands of people protests the dakota access pipeline and block roads, there is a proposal out there now that says you cannot be held liable if you run somebody over in the road who it is blocking traffic. oliver: obviously you don't want disruptions to the economy.
there is a concern this is a way to prevent protests in general to mute the protests. who is behind the bills and doing know anything about their political agendas? >> they are all republican bills. the political agenda, this was something happening before donald trump got elected. the ferguson thing was 2014, so he has only added fuel to the fire, and in the cases of a lot of the state houses where they are incurring costs, whether deploying police for example or property damage, they are trying to find a way to get their arms around this and find a legal way to tamp down on this. we get to the language of peaceful assemble. there is nothing they can do to infringe on your first amendment rights to be peaceful about this, but as we have seen unfortunately and a lot of these
instances, in north dakota, a lot of people hurt, equipment damaged and set on fire, does that constitute peaceful assembly. a lot of lawmakers would say no, so they are trying to craft legal frameworks to crack down on that. oliver: turkey's president is consolidating power and rewriting turkey politics. >> president erdogan has been trying to get the constitution change so that all executive powers will be in the hands of the president. at the moment, it is a parliamentary republic, so now the post of prime minister would be abolished and all the powers of the government would go to the president. the president would also get more power to appoint judges to the supreme court and so on, so it is immensely important. one thing that his supporters say is that look, he has already assumed these powers.
normally the turkish president is a ceremonial figure with limited powers, but in this case, president erdogan has had a difficult time since he took over president, and he has assumed a lot of those powers. this will form allies it, but most critics are justified to say what they are going to do is formalize or legitimize powers that he should not have seized, and there are good reasons why those powers should have been separated. oliver: how has the role of these terrorist attacks within turkey recently, turkey's involvement in the syrian war, and this backlash it has had with some of these extremist groups infiltrating the country and taking a role in the country, is that something the people think president erdogan needs that power to better control it? or is that more the issue that is taken up, that western
culture should push that out? >> look, there are again two different views of what happened here. his supporters will say the only path for turkey is to consolidate power into president erdogan's hands, have efficient decision-making so they can deal with these threats. the alternative view is that a lot of these problems are of president erdogan's own making. for example, when it comes to the pkk terrorist threat, that is a military campaign that the turks had to fight for tens of years and quieted down, largely because of president erdogan. he helped to get a cease-fire with the pkk, but then the akp lost an election and he called early elections to revote, and
in between that, the war started up again and re-polarized the vote so he was able to win a second time. carol: we know not everyone is on board. we can't forget the july military coup. the other thing president erdogan has to think about is that the economy had been doing well in turkey, but not so much anymore comes that my proof problematic for him. >> yes, a number of people i spoke to said the reason they want to get this referendum through quickly, april is now the likely date, but they want it quickly because the economy is deteriorating. in the third quarter last year, growth was negative. it was only a couple of years ago that turkey was growing at 10% or so a year, so there has been a sharp slowdown. it has not really hit unemployment figures, hasn't really hit people hard yet, but if it continues, it will, and so
one of the rationals about why they need this referendum quickly is that he is afraid he will lose support. getting 51% of people to vote for a referendum in his favor is difficult. carol: up next, will brokers be required to put their customers first under the trump administration? oliver: why it may not be easy to roll back all of the regulations that donald trump wants. carol: this is "bloomberg businessweek". ♪
oliver: and in london and in asia on the bloomberg radio plus app. in the markets and finance section, president trump has instructed the labor department to reconsider the fiduciary rule. carol: it requires financial advisors to put their clients interests first. >> the fiduciary rule would require financial advisors who handle retirement accounts, iras, 401(k)s, to put their clients interests first. it also gives clients and investors, makes it easier to sue financial firms where they are not being treated properly. carol: what does that mean coming first? >> there is a whole class of advisors out there now who, they are more like salespeople, where they have an incentive to steer you into particular products, house products, sold by their insurance company, higher yield
type stuff. lower liquidity to lock up your money in a variable annuity that are very expensive and consumer experts have been railing against for years. you find people to buy them, put people in these products, and as long as that product is suitable, it is ok. the new rules make it stricter and advisers have a higher bar to prove that this product is in the best interests of clients. oliver: because financial advisers expected this rule to come down the pipeline, a lot of them are taking steps to adhere to it. at the same time, there is this side effect that for some of the smaller managers and smaller clients that they work with, for them, they might start rethinking if they do have to abide by this rule, whether it is worth dealing with those types of clients? >> yeah, jp morgan, bank of america, they have already made moves and there is no sign
they're pulling back on compliance with this rule. some smaller firms are waiting and watching for what the trump administration does here. the rule is supposed to go in effect in april, so it is a question of what happens to the regulation. carol: you have come up with three questions to ask for an investor to make sure that they are indeed putting the investors interests first. >> the first thing they can ask is are you required legally to put my interests first. the second is to ask how are you being paid. what is the way that i am paying for your time to sit in front of me and give me this advice? and the final one is, what are the fees? look at the fees in the documents you have, especially expense ratios, very important. carol: because 1% or 2% of an investment portfolio adds up after time.
>> if you are saving for retirement and you have decades to go, that 1% fee year after year can have an impact. carol: president trump wants federal agencies to reduce unnecessary regulation. oliver: that could be more difficult than it seems. here is brenden greeley. brenden: the u.k. has tried, germany is working on one, the netherlands as well was so there is some precedent for this. it is not completely clear from the executive order and the clarifying memo from omd, whether we are looking at total costs, to be kept at net zero, or whether we are looking at just a number of regulations. it looks like both. that is complex and hard to do and not in keeping with the things other countries have done. the biggest changes basically
threw a lot of complicated language, this executive order says focus on the costs. the benefits are there but they may be irrelevant. carol: you also put in your article that you talk about when it comes to calculating costs and benefits, we do a fairly good job. the united states. brenden: we do. one expert produce this mammoth study on how this stuff is done for the european union. he said in terms of looking at individual regulations, the u.s. is better than any other country at figuring out both costs and benefits. where we are weaker is looking at the entire system of regulations and how they work together. i thought this was fascinating and it did not make it into the article, but we are not very good at geographic distribution. we look at the big regulatory question right now, it is the streams order that affects the coal industry.
that has tremendous impact for a small number of people in coal producing regions, and a very diffuse benefit for other people who want better stream and water quality, and so one of the things we aren't good at modeling that we need to work on this is a lot like trade, we don't really have a way of quantifying this is the region where the consequences of this regulation or felt, and then we all as americans guess the benefit, so that is one of the drawbacks. oliver: up next, why don't trump should be rooting for limited wage growth. carol: software that could help the police tracked down serial killers. oliver: that is ahead on "bloomberg businessweek". ♪ [ alarm clock beeping ]
weather. ♪ [ laughter ] cartoons. wait for it. [ cat screech ] [ laughter ] ♪ [ screaming ] [ laughter ] make everyday awesome with the power of xfinity x1... hi grandma! and the fastest internet. [ girl screaming ] [ laughter ] i've spent my life planting a size-six, non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business.
strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business. oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek". i am oliver renick. carol: i am carol massar. how to catch a killer using math and statistics. steve young goes for another mvp title with his equity firm. oliver: that is all ahead on "bloomberg businessweek". ♪ oliver: we are back with assistant managing editor jim ellis. let's talk about more must reads. monte dei paschi, an old bank in europe on the decline, and throughout that time they picked up a lot of debt.
>> a lot of debt that has caused a lot of problems in italy because it has become emblematic of what happened with lots of banks over lending, and now as the economy slows down, they are stuck with the financial system that has to be propped up by the government, which is what is happening with monte dei paschi. what is really interesting is we are getting into what in the world did this rank due to rack up $400 billion in debts that seem to be nonperforming? it is amazing. all sorts of things are all that you would even put money into, but more importantly, vineyards, villas and movie stars and rich people. they have things, they gave loans to lots of people who now have no money to pay it back, and now the government has to step in. carol: it is tough, because this bank is so distressed that it
does not want to sell at rock-bottom prices. >> the problem in italy is that rock-bottom prices really mean rock-bottom prices. a lot of things won't even get a bid and less you are cutting the asking price down by a third, and a lot of things are selling for less than half what the outstanding loan amount was, so that means do you really want to sell into that market if you are truly trying to not ream the taxpayers? carol: opening remarks, "bloomberg businessweek" economics editor, i love the story. peter takes a look at wages and the lack of growth we have seen in wages. we should be seeing wage pressures at this point considering we are at full employment. >> everybody says, oh, my god, it is difficult to hire good we should be seeing a push up on wages, and instead, in january, about 250,000 jobs were produced in january, but wages actually
just creeped up .1%. that should not be happening that way. if you have demand for jobs, people should be demanding higher wages, but there seems to be a disconnect that says maybe there is more slack in this economy than we think. maybe we are starting to see a lack of wage pressure because maybe people are moving off into other types of jobs that are not nearly well-paid, and therefore there is a lot more people out there who are willing to take a lot less money than we would normally expect. if there is more slack in the labor force, that is a good thing for mr. trump, who wants to put a stimulus into the economy. if we are bumping up against the top and we start to see wage inflation, then the fed will clamp down and not allow a lot of that growth that trump is looking for. carol: we're kind of bumping up against the speed limit of the economy. no, not at all.
oliver: let's talk about something different, but a fascinating story. this is in the features, basically, it almost feels like a david fincher movie. carol: or a michael lewis book. oliver: there you go. data plus murder, and what we can learn using big data to talk about crime. >> this is a fascinating look at something we think about using numbers for a lot of things,, michael lewis did moneyball to talk about money and sports, well this is a guy, tom hargrove, who is using data to track trying statistics, specifically murder statistics, and the hopes of linking crimes that he can say are links to serial killers. it is fascinating because he started out doing this kind of data mining as a student at my alma mater, the university of
missouri, which is a big data school, and he went from there into journalism come a tracking polling data and using the typical things you do at a newspaper, looking for financial records, but what he discovered is you could take crime statistics and run them through computer programs and algorithms and start looking for linkages between unsolved crimes. carol: bob kolker did this story. >> he is a retired data journalist who in his career was able to use publicly available data to learn rings that police don't know about or don't want us to know about. carol: what did he learn about specifically? >> he learned that the fbi compiles murder statistics from all over the country. it is not a perfect record, but the best we have, and it is publicly available. he asked a simple question, how many of the murders recorded
over the last several decades have been solved? and what he found was something incredible, which was with all the innovations in crime fighting, dna and whatnot, our ability to solve murders has gotten worse. we had something like a 90% clearance rate in the 1960's. now it is almost 60%. oliver: being that somebody has been arrested for the murder? >> not a conviction, but have arrested somebody. carol: what is going on? >> the police would say that it is a lot more stranger crime, gang related crime, and people are not coming forward and informing. they are just afraid. but that would only be true if it were consistent city by city, which isn't the case. new york's murder rate is going down still, chicago is going up, so the gang excuse only goes so far.
carol: president trump came out and highlighted chicago in particular, basically saying if you can't get your homicide and murder rates under control, the feds are going to come in. >> right. so the bloomberg story we worked on posits that this is a management problem, a resources problem, not just the police need to get tougher, and what if the whole ballot issue of black lives matter and racial justice is one component of policing, but maybe it is just as important for police to be doing the right things as it is to not be doing the wrong things. oliver: the managerial side, figuring out where all this happens, how this happens, keeping track of it, that is where hargrove comes in. he presents a solution. let's talk about the narrative behind this guy, because this story is incredible, something out of a novel. he basically contacted police
departments and notice through his own sort of algorithmic, spreadsheets, matching things up, trying to identify repeat killers. >> right, he used this by crunching publicly available data and came up with an algorithm on his own through trial and error to predict a place that might be likely to have a serial killer, and it took him a while, it essentially he crunched it, most serial killers go after women of a certain age, and he looked geographically, and this data does not know any boundaries. we all know from crime procedurals and the wired that there are jurisdictional problems. people don't care about a murder that happens outside the boundary live. tom hardgrove looked at all the data and set in the general area of gary, indiana, i see an alarming number of murders of
women that are all strange elation and all happened within a similar geographic area, then he compare that to other geographic areas around the country of similar size and he that there is something way out of whack in gary, indiana, so in 2010, he sends emails to the police chief of gary, indiana and says, i think you have a problem. no response. sure enough four years later, they arrest a serial killer. carol: up next, steve young has reinvented himself as a private equity dealmaker. this is "bloomberg businessweek". ♪
carol: unlike other athletes who have entered finance, he is actually good at it. >> the initial thinking about the story was my own curiosity to see what ex-49ers players were up to. i knew a little bit about steve young's post playing career because he is on espn. what i did not know was that his full-time day job is he is a private equity deals partner for a middle-market firm called hggc in palo alto. my day job is covering telecoms -- oliver: had you met him before? >> not knowingly. hggc has done several deals that have risen to the level where they should've been on my radar. they sold one company to -- they have an expertise in these, they buy in at about $300 million or $500 million for enterprise software companies, then they turn around and try to sell them to some of the large players in the game, and the steve young is a cofounder of
this firm, and as i got to know him over the story, he has developed a real expertise among not only private equity, but more focused on enterprise software. carol: it is not unusual for professional athletes to have a second career in the world of finance, but steve young is not just the face of this firm. he is actively involved. >> he cofounded this firm in 2007. from the point he retired in 1998, he has been interested. he developed a private equity
firm that worked in the lower middle-market with the current ceo of this new firm, who i spoke to it extensively for this story. steve young is spending his time over the course of the year traveling to board meetings. he is on the boards of a number of companies, scouting deals, fundraising across the globe. you see him on espn and you think this is his a job. it is not. it is a marketing tool for the private equity firm. hggc buys luxury suites at almost every monday night game that young does. as soon as his tv responsibilities are over, he goes up to the luxury suite, talking to portfolio companies, customers of those companies, theoretical customers, and he is
pitching them on the business. he even says he has signed up a couple of deals for companies that the fund has bought at these monday night football events. he isn't really watching the game, which is interesting if you watch his post game show, but yeah, he is doing this purely as a way to get business for the firm, and he admitted to me that if it were not for the firm, he would not be doing the espn gig. carol: a fresh take on the planned community. >> that is an amalgam of serenity, and they fuse those together. carol: it sounds very calm and pleasing. oliver: it is founded by one guy who did not intend for it to become as the as it is. >> not at all. he was in the corporate
universe. looking to open restaurants in the southeast. early 1990's, he decides he wants to have a cottage on a farm and falls in love with it. he lives there full time in 10 years later notices the urban sprawl, bands together with local land owners and they say let's make it part of this reminiscent of english villages and demographic blue zones, where people live to 100 in disproportionate measures. carol: there are lots of planned communities. he has a different approach. what are some of the particulars? >> this is very community-oriented. you have a communal mailbox. carol: it is like the bloomberg food court. >> it is like the bloomberg pantry. you have to have a front porch that covers 70% of your house, which can only be craftsman style or modern.
there is a montessori school on the premises. three couples have been divorced in 11 years, basically no crime. the garbage bins are underground so you can't see them. it basically plays on the idea that says we are trying to get back to nature. oliver: no golf course, but plenty of golf carts. what does the population look like? >> it is 550 people. they are completing the third village now. it will get up to 1000 people and take the initial investment from $15 million, and it will be worth $1 billion. carol: what does it cost to buy a home there? >> the average home price is $475,000, so that basically will determine who can and cannot move in there. oliver: up next, hollywood studios worried that the trump administration could be a threat to their growing dependence on china. that is next on "bloomberg businessweek".
carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek" i am carol massar. oliver: i am oliver renick. you can also catch us on the radio. carol: and in london and in asia on the bloomberg radio plus app. in the companies and industries section, hollywood has been working on building closer ties with china. oliver: the trump administration could be a wrinkle in those plans. >> over the past few years, hollywood has become so intertwined with china, buying up the biggest theater chains,
alibaba and other media companies investing directly. they are becoming reliant may be a strong word, but they are getting a lot of money from china to make their movies. carol: some blockbuster movies. >> the biggest ones really, transformers, mission impossible, studios like paramount, sony. they have all struck deals with chinese companies. the other thing is that the u.s. market is mature. unless you are a big movie fan, people don't go that often, and china is booming. for the past several years, they've average 35% growth. the u.s. is stagnating in comparison. so access to that market is pretty important. this year, it just so happens they were sent to renegotiate a quota that china put in place 20 years ago. carol: a quota meaning how many u.s. firms can go into the
chinese market? >> yeah, they are limited. star wars when it came out never showed. 1994, they started to let u.s. films in, and over time, that loosened, petite the wind the u.s. went to the wto and brought a case against china. carol: there are three individuals in the trump administration, the newly formed white house trade council, peter navarro, and wilbur ross. these are people who have been critical of china. >> peter navarro made a film called death by china, so i think that laid it out. robert lighthizer, they thought it was all talk before, so they really had a reputation for being tough on china. some of the executives in hollywood are not as alarmed. they appreciate that both countries have a lot to gain from this working out. oliver: that is what is unique about it.
when you think about the rhetoric from the trump administration about china, it is often grounded in raw materials, manufacturing, american companies doing something cheaper, then selling back to us, which they don't like. this is more symbiotic in some sense. this could be something that is not seen as an unfair partnership. >> president trump could actually do something quite good here for the studios. he could force through greater access for them. the question is how the chinese will react on some other points, but there is so much in it for both sides, they will not want to see this suffer. oliver: proving itself to be poker champion. carol: easily beating out its human opponents.
>> it has been a busy year are for artificial intelligence and poker. last month, there was a contest at a casino in pittsburgh in which a i played against four top human pros, and it crushed all four pros. oliver: how much did they lose? >> the official number does not mean anything. that is basically how you keep score. that comes on the heels of another artificial intelligence program beating another set of pros and the same game, and a research paper was published around the time the turn of it was starting. we've reached a point in time at least in this game, the software is better than humans. carol: how do they differ from humans?
>> the things you will notice as a player if you were to play against these particular programs is they that really strangely. they in patterns that humans don't do, putting down a lot of money at random times. they also stop and think at different times than people to. most people will stop and think -- oliver: the machine will make it seem that is thinking and stopping, or it is computing? >> when the machine decides to stop and compute the longest, it because it is the hardest. carol: the stakes are higher. >> exactly. it makes sense. it is opposite for the computers because they say i have so many chips in my hand when there is little money in the pot, there are more possibilities. oliver: the idea they are putting big bets down at random
times is to conceal their hands so perhaps when they put down a big bet they are not sure there is a good hand behind it? >> that is part of it. one reason that humans that in regular betting patterns is that it is hard to think about strategy when you are betting all kinds of random different ways. the computer can compute more possibilities and is therefore making different kinds of bets that humans would feel nervous about making. carol: what is the difference between a bot beating someone in chester checkers? >> in poker, all the players have different information. when you play chess, there is nothing to hide, same with checkers, but in poker, you are holding cards. your opponents have cards, and that means you have to make decisions based on imperfect information. carol: "bloomberg businessweek" is available on newsstands now.
oliver: and also online at bloomberg.com. carol: opening remarks, he takes a look at wage pressures him or i should say lack there of. unemployment at a low rate. we should be seeing more wage pressures in the economy. they are trying to figure out what is going on, so are a lot of economists. we are kind of bumping up against a speed bump in our economy, then that is more worrisome, because wage growth will be at anemic levels. oliver: it has implications for the president as well. carol: how about you? oliver: tracking serial killers using math and statistics. it is like moneyball for murder. it is cool the way you can use tools basically statistics to find out patterns, identify patterns. i am a math guy at heart, so i liked it. carol: moneyball for murder.
♪ announcer: the following is a paid advertisement for time life's music collection. >> ♪ chances are because i wear a silly grin the moment you ♪ announcer: there are artists we will always remember. >> ♪ mona lisa mona lisa men have named you ♪ announcer: there are beautiful songs, words, and memories that will always touch our hearts.